EASTSIDE CATHOLIC SCHOOL’S ANSWER
AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES - 2
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425service of priests and clergy and seminarians, and, therefore, are barred from consideration and/or are not actionable in this forum pursuant to the mandates of the United States and Washington State Courts and additional provisions regarding separation of church and state, pursuant to the Constitutional guarantees of the United States and of Washington, and pursuant to the religious exception.
2. In answer to paragraph 2 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Eastside Catholic denies the same. Eastside Catholic presented a job offer to Plaintiff while Plaintiff resided in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. 3. In answer to paragraph 3 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Eastside Catholic is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of Plaintiff’s averments contained in that paragraph as they appear to be averments directed at co-defendant. 4. In answer to paragraph 4 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Eastside Catholic admits the same.
5. In answer to paragraph 5 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Eastside Catholic admits that Plaintiff was hired to be Eastside Catholic’s vice principal in May of 2012 and that Plaintiff began work as vice principal in July of 2012. Eastside Catholic also admits that Plaintiff worked as a coach for Eastside Catholic’s swimming team. 6. In answer to paragraph 6 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Eastside Catholic admits that Plaintiff informed it that he was married to a man in November of 2013. Eastside Catholic was not aware that Plaintiff had a domestic partner at the time Plaintiff was hired as vice principal of Eastside Catholic. Furthermore, on July 25, 2012, Plaintiff explicitly identified his same-sex partner as his “friend” on his emergency contact form filed with Eastside Catholic. On August 20, 2012, Plaintiff filled out an updated emergency contact form where he referred to his same-